What Question 1 means for you

Thursday

Oct 16, 2008 at 2:00 AMOct 16, 2008 at 8:46 PM

We have difficult fiscal times ahead. Nationally we hope that our federal representatives had the right information when they considered the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. Here at home, Massachusetts is facing a $2 billion budget shortfall. Already, Governor Patrick has taken steps to combat this inevitable budget crunch through his own financial crisis plan.

Sen. Rob O'Leary

We have difficult fiscal times ahead. Nationally we hope that our federal representatives had the right information when they considered the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. Here at home, Massachusetts is facing a $2 billion budget shortfall. Already, Governor Patrick has taken steps to combat this inevitable budget crunch through his own financial crisis plan. This plan includes reorganizing the Mass. Turnpike Authority, reforming the State’s pension plan along with “hundreds of millions of dollars” in spending cuts in jobs and services. In addition to implementing a hiring freeze within state agencies, the Governor has also asked the Legislative and Judicial branches to make 7 percent budget cuts. I supported Senate President Murray and House Speaker Sal DiMasi when they went one step beyond the Governor’s request and committed the Legislature to a 10 percent budget cut totaling a little over $9 million. Even with these budget cuts, tighter times are ahead for everyone in Massachusetts. Complicating matters further is the upcoming binding referendum question to repeal the state income tax. If this is approved, it would take effect Jan. 1, 2009 and would take over $12 billion out of state coffers. These funds are used to pay for your schools, roads, public safety operations, transportation, court systems, higher education, economic development and hundreds of other programs. The largest chunk of money goes directly back to cities and town in the form of local aid. Cutting off that local aid, combined with doing away with state-sponsored programs, will leave thousands of your neighbors with nowhere to go to get the help they have come to rely on. Twelve billion dollars is approximately 40 percent of the state budget and there are current spending items the Commonwealth is required to pay based on legal obligations, state constitution requirements, or federal requirements whether Question 1 passes or not. These items must be paid first and will also affect the outcome of how local aid is distributed. They include Chapter 70 funding for schools, funding of the federal Medicaid program, our state’s debt service, the MBTA and the Massachusetts School Building Authority. This does not guarantee that these programs will continue to be funded at their current levels it just means that these programs cannot be completely deleted from the state budget. Local governments also have required spending programs they must fulfill. According to the state budget, the Town of Barnstable is currently scheduled to receive just over $5 million in state aid for Fiscal Year 2009 with $3.54 million left after required educational spending for Chapter 70. If Question 1 passes that will mean a decrease in state aid of close to $2 million, leaving Barnstable and you with $1,024,092 to pay for roads, human services, jails, court systems, state parks, environmental programs, and a litany of other programs. If you have an emergency, don’t you want to know that the fire department or police will come to your home and that they have the money to remain adequately staffed and operate their appropriate equipment? How can they do that if they have no budget? The Coalition for a Smaller Government would have you believe that if this initiative passes it will mean an average of $3,700 in your pocket. What they do not tell you is that most people will not see anywhere near that kind of money. The largest tax bracket in Massachusetts is people making between $25,001 and $50,000 according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a nationally recognized non-profit research organization that works to promote the most effective use of tax dollars while improving state and local governments. If you are one of the 789,993 Massachusetts residents who fall into this category you paid an average of $1,773.00 in 2008 and could expect somewhere near that number back. The 1,365,114 people who make less then $25,000 will not even see a $1,000 return but will still be responsible for paying for all the same services. However, if you are one of the 480,031 people who make over $100,000 you paid an average of $16,295 and can expect close to that in return. This does not even the playing field; this acts as an additional large tax cut for the very wealthy. In many communities the possibility for overrides of Prop 2 ½ could be very real. This has the potential to upset fragile constituent bases like the elderly, many of whom do not pay income tax in the first place, are on a fixed income and cannot afford any increases in property taxes. Whether money goes to the state first in the form of an income tax or the town decides to raise your property taxes, this will more than nullify any “rebate” you may receive through passage of this referendum. Just look to our closest neighbor, New Hampshire, and see how much money they aren’t saving by not having an income tax. According to an MSN Money Poll, New Hampshire ranks 2nd in the country in property taxes with residents there paying an average of 5.86 percent of their income on property taxes. According to the same poll, the average resident of Massachusetts only pays 3.95 percent. Times are going to be tight for everyone. Now is not the time to take your money and run away from the services that the Commonwealth provides you and your neighbors. As State Senator for the Cape and Islands I ask that when you vote on Nov. 4 you take this question very seriously, weigh all the facts, and think about how much this will impact not only you, but your neighbors, your town and the whole state.